Search

Top-down procedures for diagnosing and treating conditions such as Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder are, simply stated, logically flawed. The symptoms that form the basis for the diagnosis can be caused by myriad of other factors unrelated to bona fide (i.e., neurologically based) Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. The diagnostic power of the clinically normed, bottom-up electroencephalographic assessment is remarkable and facilitates treatment of the actual causes, neurological and experiential, of children's challenges. Neurotherapeutic treatments of these conditions are often suboptimal because symptom-based protocols are often inaccurate leading to treating the wrong disorder, not the least of which is trying to mollify normal children's behavior.

The definitive version of record of this article is available at https://doi.org/10.1177/0840470417751158., The discovery of neuroplasticity means the brain can change, functionally, in response to the environment and to learning. While individuals can develop harmful patterns of brain activity in response to stressors, they can also learn to modify or control neurological conditions associated with specific behaviors. Neurotherapy is one way of changing brain functioning to modify troubling conditions which can impair leadership performance, through responding to feedback on their own brain activity, and enhancing optimal leadership functioning through learning to maximize such cognitive strengths as mental efficiency, focus, creativity, perseverance, and executive functioning. The present article outlines the application of the concept of optimal performance training to organizational leadership in a healthcare context, by describing approaches to neurotherapy and illustrating their application through a case study of a health leader learning to overcome the neurological and emotional sequelae of workplace stress and trauma.

Following participation in an experiment, nine subjects were interviewed and debriefed by a single experimenter. Two temporal measures of vocalization were derived from 7.5 second samples obtained during the dialogue and monologue portions of the debriefing. Marked influence of the interviewee on the interviewer's vocal patterning was apparent for both the dialogue and the monologue. The differences between the two vocalization measures and the possible implications of such subtle nonlexical influences are discussed.

Considerable controversy still exists regarding the concepts of threat and power in the conflict literature. The simple existence of a punitive capability by one or both parties to a gaming conflict has been defined as threat (Deutsch and Krauss, 1960). Others have maintained, however, that the term "threat" should be reserved for situations in which the party possessing the punitive capability is perceived by the second party as having the intention of using the capability should certain conditions prevail. The intention to use, or more precisely the lack of intention to preclude use of, the capability is typically related to the behavior of the second party to the conflict. Thus, offensive deterrence is the perceived intention to use the capability in counterretaliation. Defensive deterrence, on the other hand, is the perceived intent to retaliate. The credibility of threat, however, depends solely upon the perceived probability that one will experience the punishment. This perceived probability is influenced by a wide range of factors including the threatener's history of fulfilled promises to harm, the error in the system (accidental execution of the capability), the cost to the threatener of use of the capability, and the extent of the